Peering versus Transit

Mon Sep 30 07:34:46 UTC 1996

> Is it really the case that people with routers at exchange points actually
> consider a packet addressed to one of their own customers to be theft of
> service?  So far, I note, we haven't heard any position expressed by
> any of the big folks, just by others outraged on their behalf.

No, the point is sending data through another IXP member without
recieving the invitation, in the form of a route advertisment, is
stealing. You are using resources that you do not have permission
to use.

Some of us are very sensitive about this, and once when we lost
all connecivity to the outside of the UK (going back about 18 months
now) we made sure we *phoned* a couple of LINX peers (thanks to
those at PIPEX and JANET at the time) to ask if we could just add
forwarder entried in our DNS servers towards them for some level
of name service. JANET was also down - same tx atlanic cable, but
PIPEX had connectivity. They said yes, and then we did. I treat
unwelcome data at whatever level as theft of something that belongs
to me/us etc.

The really sad thing is that in that 18 months, I can't see the
above being repeated again, since most ISPs are now run by faceless
monsters and not the engineers (who made it all work). Death of
the net predicted... pics at 11.

Regards,
-- 
Peter Galbavy                                           peter at wonderland.org
@ Home                                                 phone://44/973/499465
in Wonderland                              http://www.wonderland.org/~peter/
                               snail://UK/NW1_6LE/London/21_Harewood_Avenue/